Afternoon Miscellany

“There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens…By enforcing this statute, Arizona would impose a ‘distinct, unusual and extraordinary’ burden on legal resident aliens that only the federal government has the authority to impose.”

.
In Obama World, if I am an illegal, I can break our laws and suffer no consequences. I can just say “No habla English”. I can then go on my merry way and basically give the middle finger to America.
.
Wow. It gets better and better everyday in America. Soon you too will be speaking spanish. Better buy your self teaching guide to spanish now folks. You can tell our policemen and women to basically go “F-yourself man” in Spanish.

–The DNC presents the “Republican Tea Party Contract On America.” Sen. John Cornyn blasts Democrats for practicing “the politics of fear.”

Yes, the Republicans have the corner on the fear market and we dare anyone else to use it.

At least the “Tea Party Contract on America” is accurate.
.
As for “Afternoon Miscellany”, I am beginning to look forward to it. Only the tonguethumped would find it boring…

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local-beat/Mexican-Man-Pummeled-in-Latest-Staten-Island-Hate-Attack-99325314.html
.

Mexican Officials to Patrol Staten Island Following Latest Bias Attack

Does that mean that when I’m frightened by a rabid dog in the neighborhood, I will have to pay a royalty to the RNC?
.
Damn. So that where the money comes that’s funneled to FOX…

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100727/ap_on_go_co/us_rangel_ethics
.
WASHINGTON – New York Democrat Charles Rangel made a last-minute effort Tuesday to settle his ethics case and prevent a House trial that could embarrass him and damage the Democratic Party.

The talks between Rangel’s lawyer and the House ethics committee’s nonpartisan attorneys were confirmed by ethics Chairman Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif. Lofgren said she is not involved in the talks, and added that the committee’s lawmakers have always accepted the professional staff’s recommendations in previous plea bargains.

Rangel, a 40-year House veteran who is 80 years old, would have to admit to multiple, substantial ethics violations for any plea bargain to be accepted. Earlier negotiations broke down when Rangel would only admit to some allegations — not enough to satisfy the committee lawyers, according to people familiar with those talks who were not authorized to be quoted by name.
.
Deal or no deal, Howie? America is shafted yet again by the Democrats led by her majesty, Pelosi-the-Hun.

Is Cronyn being ironic?

The Federal Debt, just how gloomy is it now?
.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/116xx/doc11659/07-27_Debt_FiscalCrisis_Brief.pdf
.
Don’t read it. It basically says we are all going to hell in a hand-basket.
.
Thanks Barry Obama!! Yes we can!!!

“It basically says we are all going to hell in a hand-basket.”
.
At least you’re consistent. Previously, on Rusty’s World™…
.
“I am also not a religious zealot or fundamentalist, but this also REEKS in connections to writings I have read on how the Anti-Christ will take over the world. Just saying. Get out your copies of the Late Great Planet Earth and other various once widely believed science fiction books on the apocalypse. ”
.
You still haven’t answered, Rusty. Do you stand by your statements? Is Obama the anti-Christ?

Repeal the Affordable Care Act (Health Insurance Reform)

==
Shouldn’t there be truth in advertising laws that cover Congress. That way we could jail everyone who voted for this since it is neither affordable nor Health Insurance reform.

==
Cap liabilities for those responsible for environmental disasters like the Gulf oil spill

Wonder How many Democrats voted for the cap. I am sure the Demos would instead put lawyers in charge. That way 1/3 to 1/2 of the money could disappear even before getting to the problem that needed to be resolved.

Thanks for posting that article, Rusty. Its good to be reminded that the violent, hateful rhetoric coming from the rabid right has consequences.
.
“The latest victim is a construction worker who has called the United States his home for the last five years”
.
I’m just surprised you’re willing to admit it. Taking responsibility for hate speech has not been your forte, lately. Bravo.

Sorry, I do not respond to disturb individuals like you momentoad who are stalkers. Enjoy!!

Is Cronyn being ironic?

Not as far as he realizes anyway.

I was in Lancaster recently, so I thought you’d appreciate this scene from the bar one night.
~
Guy: Hitting on girl in my group

Girl: “Aren’t you married? And isn’t she right behind you?”

Guy: “She’s cool with it.”

Me: “So you and your wife have a liberal attitude towards marriage?”

Guy: “F*ck you a$$hole!! I’m no f*cking liberal!” Guy stalks off.
~
Absolutely hilarious. You guys are free in PA, just not from ideology.

@apr2563, Big John is too stupid to do irony.

“Sorry, I do not respond to disturb individuals like you momentoad who are stalkers. Enjoy!!”
.
I’ll take that as a confirmation that you’re a delusional paranoid.
.
And considering your anti-Christ rant quoted above comes from the fourth link you get when you Google ‘newfreedomblog’, it doesn’t take a whole lot of stalking to find proof that your insane delusions run much deeper than you’re willing to reveal on Swampland. And that’s saying something considering the level of rancor you display here.
.
You’re fooling no one.
.
I encourage everyone to explore your prior screeds before engaging you on any serious level.
http://www.google.com/search?q=newfreedomblog

distinct, unusual and extraordinary’ burden on legal resident aliens

It also places a distinct, unusual and extraordinary burden on Hispanic citizens. It’s nice that the law tries to state that race can’t be a basis for a “reasonable suspicion” but what else do suppose a cop is going to use?

I think that GOPers look at the 4th Amendment they way they look at a four iron.
.
It never comes out of the bag…

The winner of Most Boring Blogger….
.
Oh, shoot, he said “Article” didn’t he. Dang.

“The Federal Debt, just how gloomy is it now?…Don’t read it. It basically says we are all going to hell in a hand-basket.”
.
We tried to warn you:

Future generations will be forced to pay for them through higher taxes and/or reduced government services. It’s unfair to burden our children and grandchildren with these debts. It’s doubly unfair to expect future generations of middle- and lower-income Americans to pay for large tax cuts enjoyed by today’s affluent Americans.

http://www.aflcio.org/mediacenter/speakout/jf_js.cfm

“Christopher Beam examines the semiotics of taxes”
.
‘That like the Hippocrates of Love?

“Absolutely hilarious. You guys are free in PA, just not from ideology.”

Probably explains why we suffer under Democratic rule and union stupidity since forever

“It’s nice that the law tries to state that race can’t be a basis for a “reasonable suspicion” but what else do suppose a cop is going to use?”

How about any other number of laws the state has that might be broken? Yeah I guess that is too sensible of an explanation when you are looking for a racist at every turn.

To Stuart Zechman and Glenn “Leaks never ever kill or harm anyone” Greenwald:
.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20011886-503543.html
.
“Wikileaks Reportedly Outs 100s of Afghan Informants”

US and NATO forces continue to anger Afghan civilians and push them toward the Taliban
.
Survivors of an alleged Nato rocket attack on a small town in Helmand, which the Afghan government says killed 52 civilians, spoke today of their anger at what they claim was a deliberate air strike, despite coalition denials.

The incident is alleged to have taken place last Friday in Regey, in the volatile Sangin district of Helmand. News of it came as a deluge of leaked US army documents about previously unreported civilian killings threatens to ruin Nato’s attempts to persuade Afghans that it takes innocent deaths seriously.
.
Many residents of the town say they believe the strike, which they say was a missile attack on a mud house where people were hiding from nearby fighting, was deliberate. “The foreign forces could see us,” said Haji Abdul Ghafar, a 38-year-old farmer who had fled to Regey from a nearby village. “We were not in any hideouts. The Americans can see tiny things on the ground, but they could not see us. I think they bombed us on purpose.”
…
“When Taliban fight, they always tell us to leave the area,” he said. “Even before this fighting, Taliban told us to leave the area and we left.”
.
.
(see too “Some of the worst civilian casualties” section at the end)

“One specific example cited by the paper is a report on an interview conducted by military officers of a potential Taliban defector. The militant is named, along with his father and the village in which they live.”
.
And Wikileaks still has 15000 more documents that they are redacting for sensitive information. Hopefully, they will do a better job than with the previous 92000.

Wow, that’s big. Thank you nibbly.
.
If it’s true, as reported, then I owe danielatlanta and earljr an apology.

Yes, and when I brought up this possibility a couple days ago, both Cliff and Stuart jumped all over me.
.
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/07/25/the-wikileaks-afghan-document-dump/#comments
.
Me: “If someone from our side is killed as a result of disclosure, would you or Greenwald feel differently?”
.
Cliff: “Man, this old chestnut gets trotted out so often that I’m going to have to ask for some evidence that this has ever happened.”

Deal or no deal, Howie? America is shafted yet again by the Democrats led by her majesty, Pelosi-the-Hun.

The talks between Rangel’s lawyer and the House ethics committee’s nonpartisan attorneys were confirmed by ethics Chairman Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif. Lofgren said she is not involved in the talks, and added that the committee’s lawmakers have always accepted the professional staff’s recommendations in previous plea bargains.

LMAO.. Thank you RustyDog, for contradicting and refuting your own statement.

How, Rusty, is actually trying to get an answer from someone stalking? Oh yeah, since Palin made stalking the buzzword of the day.

PS- I’m not suggesting that US/NATO forces target civilians. But civilian casualties are a potential consequence of any missile attack- it is unavoidable. This article, and especially the quotes from a local man, show that our campaign in Afghanistan is not winning the people over. One can easily see how our actions create more enemies than they can ever eliminate and hurt national security.

This is really disgusting, Rustyblog.
.
I would suggest walking some of this back, if I were you.
.
What does speaking Spanish have to do with anything?
.
Don’t you understand that you’re making your position into one of obvious prejudice against these people, even if you lead with “break our laws”?
.
The problem of illegal workers isn’t that they speak Spanish, Rustydog. It isn’t even really that they broke immigration law. It’s that employers hire them for less money than their labor would be worth, if it wasn’t sold on the black market. If there were truly a free market –not a “guest worker program”– for these peoples’ labor, then America would be much better off.
.
How do you expect anybody except the lowest of the low embittered fools to agree with you, when you come here with this “Those illegals are taking over our country!” sh*t, Rustydog?
.
No, Spanish-speaking people are not coming here to colonize the United States. Only a demagogue, a f*cking idiot or a Klansman would say that.
.
Walk that back, Rustydog. Your credibility can only improve, if you do.

It’s just too ridiculous that you’ve finally figured out that Afghan people may be harmed in the war going on over there in Afghanistan –now that Wikileaks and its shadowy master of puppets Julian Assange became involved.
.
As Greenwald put it today:

So the WikiLeak-ed documents might put Afghans at risk? You know what else does? 10 yrs of bombings, air raids, checkpoint shootings, drones

Does this selective outrage not seem slightly…skewed to you?

I think one of the problems with the political discourse is this sense of seeing someone on the other side doing something disagreeable, people criticizing it, and then pointing to the original wrongdoing when something on their side does something similar. We shouldn’t be defending things on the basis of parity, but on the basis of whether or not we think it’s wrong. No, I don’t like that we’ve been in Afghanistan this long or that many Afghans have dies. But just because Afghans have been at risk doesn’t make it right to bridle them with additional risk, specifically the prospect of 100′s of our informants being outed. Let’s not be satisfied with compounding things just because the compounder has liberal ties/sympathies.

*died

momento, what screeds are you referring to? His blog site is a collection paranoid delusions, ads, and patriotic slogans I doubt he can understand, much less apply.

Have I missed some paragraph in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights that says everyone in America has to speak English?

America has always been a country of immgrants and descendants of immigrants. Indeed “newfreedomblog” sounds positively slavic. Is it short for “newfreedomblogoyevitch”? Do you have family in Chicago?

The Founding Fathers embraced a set of principles based around the concepts of “liberte, egalite, fraternite. (In those days no one had a problem with embracing French as a language in which certain sectors of government did business.) Sadly the Republican equivalent these days is moi, moi and moi

“Christopher Beam examines the semiotics of taxes.”

I don’t really get all the mystery that surrounds the issue of whether letting the Bush tax cuts expire is a tax hike or not. First of all, the fact that they are expiring ought to be a clue to the mystery. Since they have an expiry date, they were never meant to last in the first place. They were a temporary tax cut by design, by nature. The expiry of a temporary tax cut is not a tax hike. That is why they refer to them as sun set taxes, because at the end of the day, they disappear.

Some things just aren’t that complicated. They are what they appear to be.

War is not pretty, stuart and yes, civilian casualties are inevitable. I can tell you though, from first hand experience, that civilians were NEVER a deliberate target. I can also tell you, when we were not treating combat casualties, we were treating the civilian population for a multitude of illnesses. Everything from heart surgery to delivering babies. The taliban were and are, a brutal presence in Afghanistan, with the civilian population living in fear and subjugation. The majority of Afghani’s want them gone and many risked brutal torture by providing U.N. forces with helpful information regarding Taliban intentions and whereabouts. I am shocked and appalled that wikileak exposed the names of some of these patriots, because the consequences will be horrendous…these people and their families will be tortured and killed. The man (men) responsible for this unconscionable act have committed high treason and should be punished accordingly.

Let’s not be so incredibly obtuse as to focus our outrage and concern primarily on the Afghans imperiled by the public release of documentation demonstrating that the US has known quite well the futility of the war that has brought incomparable misery to the rest of Afghanistan:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/25/afghanistan-civilian-deaths-rules-engagement
.
Afghanistan war logs: Secret CIA paramilitaries’ role in civilian deaths
.
Innocent Afghan men, women and children have paid the price of the Americans’ rules of engagement
.
An Afghan girl lies on a hospital bed in Helmand after being injured in an airstrike by coalition forces in June 2007. Photograph: Abdul Qodus/Reuters
.
Shum Khan, a man both deaf and unable to speak, lived in the remote border hamlet of Malekshay, 7,000ft up in the mountains. When a heavily armed squad from the CIA barrelled into his village in March 2007, the war logs record that he “ran at the sight of the approaching coalition forces … out of fear and confusion”.
.
The secret CIA paramilitaries, (the euphemism here is OGA, for “other government agency”) shouted at him to stop. Khan could not hear them. He carried on running. So they shot him, saying they were entitled to do so under the carefully graded “escalation of force” provisions of the US rules of engagement.
.
Khan was wounded but survived. The Americans’ error was explained to them by village elders, so they fetched out what they term “solatia”, or compensation. The classified intelligence report ends briskly: “Solatia was made in the form of supplies and the Element mission progressed”.
.
Behind the military jargon, the war logs are littered with accounts of civilian tragedies. The 144 entries in the logs recording some of these so-called “blue on white” events, cover a wide spectrum of day-by-day assaults on Afghans, with hundreds of casualties.
.
They range from the shootings of individual innocents to the often massive loss of life from air strikes, which eventually led President Hamid Karzai to protest publicly that the US was treating Afghan lives as “cheap”. When civilian family members are actually killed in Afghanistan, their relatives do, in fairness, get greater solatia payments than cans of beans and Hershey bars. The logs refer to sums paid of 100,000 Afghani per corpse, equivalent to about £1,500.
.
US and allied commanders frequently deny allegations of mass civilian casualties, claiming they are Taliban propaganda or ploys to get compensation, which are contradicted by facts known to the military.
.
But the logs demonstrate how much of the contemporaneous US internal reporting of air strikes is simply false.

Nobody is arguing that two wrongs make a right, it’s obnoxious to assert that’s the case.
.
What’s being argued is that knowing with certainty what those who have the power to classify deny publicly, namely that we are engaged in a profoundly destructive, counterproductive and ultimately futile enterprise, in which Afghan lives are being treated as such:

Bloody errors at civilians’ expense, as recorded in the logs, include the day French troops strafed a bus full of children in 2008, wounding eight. A US patrol similarly machine-gunned a bus, wounding or killing 15 of its passengers, and in 2007 Polish troops mortared a village, killing a wedding party including a pregnant woman, in an apparent revenge attack.

makes the highly selective concern being voiced in some quarters over the safety of Afghan informants named in the documents ludicrous and appalling.
.
Of course no one excuses the lack of discretion and redaction that should have been applied to these individuals’ names. Of course no one argues that their danger is somehow justified, it never is.
.
But the jeopardy these individuals now face as a result of these documents’ release can’t honestly be the source of outrage, not when that sort of failure by Wikileaks to protect Afghan civilians is compared to the strafing of school buses.
.
It seems that this bizarre focus, not on the actual content detailing the horrors of a mismanaged and futile conflict involving civilians, but on the potential danger of others whose names were released, are revealing of a strange set of standards.
.
What about this episode could possibly serve to remind some primarily of the dangers of leaked classified material, instead of the dangers of a war enterprise run amok in foreign lands?
.
What kind of thinking goes into exclaiming “You see! our Afghan informants were endangered! Leaking classified information is wrong!“, when the information contained in these documents reveals a far, far more profound tragedy than even that –tragedy that we can stop, now that we know it with certainty?

I knew it…

“Nobody is arguing that two wrongs make a right, it’s obnoxious to assert that’s the case.”
.
Actually, if the document leak (essentially by US military personnel) results in a shortened US presence in Afghanistan, which could mean far fewer Afghan and US troop deaths, even if some smaller number die as a result of the leaks themselves, it could be exactly that. That is the typical, horrible calculus of war, which is why liberals always insist that we try never to go there unless we absolutely must.

He’s just not satisfied with Black or Japanese race-bating, he’s going after the Latino community too.
.
Hells Bells Rusty, why stop there. You are seriously on a roll. Even SZ is calling you out, and believe me, I have a lot of respect for his views, even if we don’t see eye to eye on things!
.
The consensus, as they say in scientific circles, strongly supports…

You can tell our policemen and women to basically go “F-yourself man” in Spanish.
.
Chinga su madre, pendejo cabron.

From the article:
.

“The leaks certainly have put in real risk and danger the lives and integrity of many Afghans,” a senior official at the Afghan foreign ministry told The Times on condition of anonymity. “The U.S. is both morally and legally responsible for any harm that the leaks might cause to the individuals, particularly those who have been named. It will further limit the U.S./international access to the uncensored views of Afghans.”
.
One former intelligence official told the paper that the Taliban could launch revenge attacks on “traitors” in the coming days.

.
I’ll grant that this is evidence that the leaks have an effect.
.
But first off, is the US legally and morally responsible for the bombed wedding and strafed school buses and random people shot by Spec Ops and innocent men thrown into the Bagram black site?
.
Second off, that’s a nice touch having an anonymous former intelligence official throw out some scary quotes about upcoming violence. Never seen that before. That’s real convincing.
.
And when you said “someone from our side” (and this is kind of nitpicky on my part) I was thinking more about US and NATO personnel, as opposed to Afghanis.
.
After all, Hamid Karzai and Pakistan are supposed to be on our side, right? Right?

Since they have an expiry date, they were never meant to last in the first place. They were a temporary tax cut by design, by nature.
.
I’m cynical enough to question this.
.
When we have the entire right wing of the nation and a good number of Blue Dogs insisting, day after day after day, that taxes on the rich must never be raised even if they bankrupt the nation, I begin to think that “temporary tax cut” was just the candy coating to make the poison go down easier.

Cliff, since I specifically cite ‘informants’ in the original thread I link above where you accuse of me “that old chestnut” it’s absurd for you to claim you didn’t think I included Afghanis as “someone from our side.” I encourage you to go back to that thread and re-read what was made clear.

Yes, Stuart, how easy for you to make an equivalence, and Shepherd really not making any distinctions between civilian collateral deaths, which are tragic, and those Afghanis who actively assist our side and are targeted to death for that. Afghani informants save US soldiers’ lives and further our goals against the Taliban, but to you they are as disposable as anyone else. Great attitude.
.
Frankly, I don’t know why any citizens of occupied countries help us. When we evacuated South Vietnam, we left many native employees and informants to their deaths. As for Iraq, George Packer has written extensively how it was impossible to get visas for Iraqis who worked as interpreters and informants in the Green Zone, even when their lives became imminently in danger. We have a history of abandoning those who help us. The attitude of Stuart and Shepherd reflect this.

Let me clarify my comment of Stuart’s false equivalence as decisions and accidents made in the field of battle that result in the tragic loss of civilian lives and Julian Assange’s quest for publicity in his hasty sloppy release of these documents. I expressed my concern about trusting this mysterious man and his possible motives, which Stuart mocked. Now we see Assange doing a world-wide media blitz; he seems to be doing interviews with everyone. Meanwhile, his sloppy job will cost lives.
.
Why do you support this man so much, Stuart? Enlighten the rest of us of what you know about him. Because so far what we’ve gotten from this Wikileaks reveal is no revelatory new information but just enough detail to get people killed. Oh, and a whole lot of hype for Wikileaks and Julian Assange.

“his sloppy job will cost lives”
.
Right.
.
It’s not the Pakistaini ISI and the sloppy job that leadership have done managing this failed enterprise, it’s “Julian Assange’s quest for publicity.”
.
That you can’t apparently imagine that this story is about anything other than “a whole lot of hype for Wikileaks and Julian Assange” speaks volumes to the lengths you are going to avoid a discussion of its real substance: that we are failing over there, and the Obama Administration’s escalation policies will not correct that failure.
.
Once again, you’d like to litter the debate with any hyperbole or non sequiteur you can think of (“trusting this mysterious man and his possible motives“, “to you they are as disposable as anyone else“, “we left many native employees and informants to their deaths“), instead of turning your attention to what the documents detail and reveal.
.
What’s revealed is important, far more important than the security implications of the leaks: US leadership is completely aware that our “ally” Pakistan is harboring, funding and supplying the same Taliban who kill American and NATO troops using our tax dollars to do so.
.
Therefore, sending 30,000 more troops to fight an un-winnable fight will fail. Our leadership, this Administration, knows they can’t succeed at the things they’re telling us to spend lives and treasure on attempting.
.
The enterprise is a gigantic, tragic waste, and those in power know it.
.
That’s the story; that’s the real subject of the discussion.
.
Instead, though, the constructed Administration and partisan/war supporter narrative gets dutifully trotted out “so far what we’ve gotten from this Wikileaks reveal is no revelatory new information“. For anyone who still finds themselves susceptible to that line, those who haven’t actually seen as much reporting about what’s in the leaks, because of the bipartisan narrative shift to “can the leaks harm us?,” I’d suggest they just watch a little bit of this neat show on Comedy Central, which explains how disingenuous that line is, and how it allows everyone charged with dealing with a leak of this importance an easy way out of a hard discussion:
.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/28/jon-stewart-mocks-media-f_n_661824.html
.
Finally, this:
.
“Frankly, I don’t know why any citizens of occupied countries help us.”
.
just speaks for itself, doesn’t it?

Hey ohio, checkout his feed on the Tea Party Patriots site
.
http://www.teapartypatriots.org/Status.aspx?username=newfreedomblog
.
Obama’s the anti-Christ. Obama’s got an intentional plan to destroy America and freedom. Etc. Etc.
.
And I don’t think its just rhetorical flourishes. Right-wingers like Rusty talk amongst themselves in a much different way than they talk in mixed company. They know paranoid one-world government conspiracies and apocalyptic biblical theories don’t go over so well amongst the sane. Even guys like Beck and Hannity have a different tone on the radio than they do on their tv shows.

The tax cuts are set to expire because they needed to be passed by reconciliation in order to shut out Dem Senate opposition. Therefore the budget window had to be under 10 years.
.
For anyone who followed the HCR debate, it’s an exceedingly familiar story. This of course makes even more comical, the OUTRAGE that the Republicans expressed at Health Care reform being RAMMED through.

Yes stuart, sometimes in life when our laws are totally disregarded it is “really disgusting”. It not only allows and permits those who have crossed over our unprotected borders illegally to break our laws. It also permits thugs like those in New York, your city of what appears to be brotherly hate to attack people.
.
While you are reading some type of racists statement I have made in my two comments, that is not only false, but you are grabbing at straws. In my first comment, I am stating that illegal’s who do primarily speak Spanish only, can excuse themselves from breaking our laws and simply say, “no habla English”. The police cannot do anything unless they have actually witnessed the crime themselves as it occurred. The 2nd comment I made depicts a situation where these same individuals are preyed upon by those who seek to harm them in some way. By allowing the first event to go unchallenged, you set up the 2nd event to happen.
.
If our laws were upheld, and Obama would enforce those laws and secure the border, these types of events would not so easily occur. You by stating, “The problem of illegal workers isn’t that they speak Spanish, Rustydog. It isn’t even really that they broke immigration law. It’s that employers hire them for less money than their labor would be worth, if it wasn’t sold on the black market.”.
.
This is the problem stuart. This is the problem that those of us who are demanding this Administration do something now with the laws already existing so more poor people like this 40-year-old Mexican man are not taken advantage of. By enforcing our laws another 40 year old man will not suffer bodily harm at the hands of those who will exploit him and beat him up.
.
Yes employers are guilty of hiring people who are undocumented so they do not have to pay taxes. But, if our laws were enforced, and the illegal’s were stopped from entering this country to begin with, the employer would not have the opportunity to hire an illegal. The thugs who beat up this poor man would not have the opportunity to beat up another illegal.
.
Now with the AZ lawsuit being struck down for the most part, it is free reign on those who will take advantage of these people. It allows for those undocumented Latinos to freely go anywhere they choose in America and risk being caught in another situation where some evil people will harm them because they believe they can get away with it. We permit by not enforcing our laws to allow someone to be harmed, who is here illegally, to be mugged, raped, and even murdered. YOU are allowing that to happen stuart. You are allowing these poor individuals you THINK you are protecting with your holier than tho attitude to ignore our laws to continue to be beaten and forced into a new form of slavery.
.
Rather give our policemen and women the tools necessary to preemptively stop crimes from happening against these vulnerable people, your ilk have instead subjected them to this type of hate crimes. You ignoring the fact that there are segments of our population who will take those actions, and it is permitted for them to do so because of you and Obama ignoring our laws. You allow the illegal’s like I said to basically go without fear and risk harm not only to themselves but their family.
.
You see stuart you see it as some type of racial or racist thing. I see it as someone coming to this country, who does not understand our laws, does not speak English which is the language our laws are written, and they are put into a situation of harm. They can now freely go their way and never be questioned. They can potentially become another victim because you and Barack Obama are ignoring the laws as written.
.
I want legal immigration. I want them to come to this country LEGALLY. I want to teach them English so they can more fully understand the greatness of this country. It is no different if I would move to Mexico, I would want to know and understand Spanish. I know that would be better for me to know Spanish and understand exactly what is written into their laws. I would want to have the opportunity to communicate with people who predominantly speak Spanish.

Cliff:
.
Rusty is a piece of work, isn’t he…

“But, if our laws were enforced, and the illegal’s were stopped from entering this country to begin with, the employer would not have the opportunity to hire an illegal.”
.
40% of illegal immigrants in this country crossed the border legally and overstayed their VISAs. I’ve yet to hear you mention anything about them, despite the fact that they’re the easiest to track because we have all their biometric data as part of USVISIT.
.
Based on your above statement, Rusty appears to believe that’s its all the illegal employees fault, not the employer. How dare those illegals get themselves hired by our noble, freedom loving, free-marketeers! We can’t penalize those beloved capitalists! We need them to stimulate the economy!
.
But what does the rabid right focus on? Mexicans crossing the border. When your focus on an issue narrows to a single demographic – the Hispanics – and ignores the other large pieces of the problem – illegal employers and non-border hopping illegal immigrants – then at best, you’re a xenophobic nativist; at worst, you’re racist.
.
I grew up with Archie Bunker politics like Rusty’s. I hope it see its extinction in my lifetime.

I pointed this out the other day in another thread. I think it can’t be said often enough as the Republicans have no shame about any of their hypocrisy. Unfortunately, because the media repeat their talking points so often with no regard to what happened, their narrative is the one that takes hold.

Let’s see in momentoad’s world, 40% of over 12 million people is far more the problem than 60% of over 12 million people. Hmmmm. I guess arithmetic is not one of your strong attributes either.
.
How about we go after 100% of those who are here ILLEGALLY? Now that is math you cannot dispute.

Deflect, deflect as fast as you can. Too bad you can’t go back to your past posts and edit them, Stuart.
.
There’s another little show on Comedy Central.
Stephen Colbert, on the WikiLeaks revelations: “Innocent people have died, Pakistan is not the most trustworthy partner, and Afghanistan is a tough place to wage a war. This information and more is also available on my new website, ‘ObviLeaks.’” — from TPM

I’ll add that we need to see if the article is accurate. A “senior official” from Afghanistan and “one former intelligence official” from the US is not enough to convince me.
.
If Afghanis cooperating with US intelligence officials have been outed, that is wrong. It speaks to the dangerous nature of leaked material.
.
I’m a bit torn here. I still believe that the failure of the media and congress to provide oversight and to penetrate the cult of secrecy necessitates whistle-blowers. But it is dangerous. And we’ll never be sure that the leakers are able and willing to protect information with genuine security value.
.
I also believe the Pentagon and administration’s disdain for this type of thing is out of self-preservation and to avoid embarrassment more-so than concern for Afghanis, and possibly for its own soldiers.
.
And, as I’ve said before, I understand that soldiers’ may feel betrayed (which is significant to me). But I suspect that WikiLeaks will do more good than harm.

You do realize that other people notice when you try to make the subject about me, rather than the Obama Administration’s knowledge of its failing, obscenely expensive occupation policy, right?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/29/opinion/29kristof.html
.
The war in Afghanistan will consume more money this year alone than we spent on the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, the Mexican-American War, the Civil War and the Spanish-American War — combined.
.
A recent report from the Congressional Research Service finds that the war on terror, including Afghanistan and Iraq, has been, by far, the costliest war in American history aside from World War II. It adjusted costs of all previous wars for inflation.
.
Those historical comparisons should be a wake-up call to President Obama, underscoring how our military strategy is not only a mess — as the recent leaked documents from Afghanistan suggested — but also more broadly reflects a gross misallocation of resources. One legacy of the 9/11 attacks was a distortion of American policy: By the standards of history and cost-effectiveness, we are hugely overinvested in military tools and underinvested in education and diplomacy.
.
It was reflexive for liberals to rail at President George W. Bush for jingoism. But it is President Obama who is now requesting 6.1 percent more in military spending than the peak of military spending under Mr. Bush. And it is Mr. Obama who has tripled the number of American troops in Afghanistan since he took office. (A bill providing $37 billion to continue financing America’s two wars was approved by the House on Tuesday and is awaiting his signature.)
.
Under Mr. Obama, we are now spending more money on the military, after adjusting for inflation, than in the peak of the cold war, Vietnam War or Korean War. Our battle fleet is larger than the next 13 navies combined, according to Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The intelligence apparatus is so bloated that, according to The Washington Post, the number of people with “top secret” clearance is 1.5 times the population of the District of Columbia.
.
Meanwhile, a sobering report from the College Board says that the United States, which used to lead the world in the proportion of young people with college degrees, has dropped to 12th.

I am for “legal” immigration. I am not for medical benefits for illegals, education for illegals, subsidized housing for illegals, food stamps for illegals, anchor babies. I am not for “push 2 for English”. I am not for drivers licenses for illegals or auto insurance for illegals, or state identification cards for illegals. I am not for sanctuary cities for illegals. I am not for illegals voting in American elections. I am not for America kissing the ring of the Mexican President. I am not for America bowing to the foreign policy demands of Mexico. I am not for illegal aliens renting housing of any kind in America. I am not for illegal aliens working in America, at any job, at any level.

And I am not a right wing person. I grew up as a liberal democrat and am now a progressive independent.

But I am tired of America and Americans going down the toilet bowl due to the impact of illegal aliens.

And I am not for amnesty, no matter how you try and package it to make it appear as something different.

What we haven’t actually addressed yet is the quote that started this thread…

Many are interpreting (honestly or to better their own political positioning) the concern over the treatment of *legal* citizens as a lack of concern over the impact of *illegal* citizens. It comes down to whether you believe that it’s better to let a few criminals walk free than detain an innocent man. If you’re willing to detain citizens in order to catch criminals, then you’d be in favor of the law. If not, you’re against it. (Not to mention the concerns over the Fourth Amendment… I’ll leave that alone, as it seems more cut-and-dry.)

Regardless of your position, I think reasonable people can agree that the federal government’s policy of ignoring immigration reform for the last 20 years has been at best irresponsible. Most reasonable people want to ensure taxes are paid, wages are fair, and the impact of “cheap illegal labor” isn’t manifested as job losses for law-abiding citizens or impacts to health insurance premiums. Simplifying the controversy to “You don’t care about illegal immigrants breaking the law!” or “You’re just a racist!” doesn’t get us anywhere in the long run, because it delays our ability to find common ground and move legislation forward (although I’m sure it’s great for motivating the electoral base on both sides of the aisle.)

The problem is two-fold for me.

First, not all states require “proof of citizenship” when issuing driver’s licenses. If this is the case, then what documentation will be required to prove that you’re here legally? For an American Citizen, we are unlikely to drive around with birth certificates and passports on hand; we leave those in our safe deposit boxes with our Social Security cards. For a legal alien, they do most likely carry some paperwork declaring legal status. The problem now becomes detaining citizens who may only have their drivers license during a traffic stop. Perhaps a “national ID card” needs to be instituted as part of immigration reform… or better standards for the issuance of driver’s licenses.

Second, I, like others, am not sure how one distinguishes–as the law explicitly requires an officer to judge–between “suspicious” criminals and “unsuspicious” criminals in terms of illegal status without either carding all arrestees or resorting to (explicitly stated in the law) illegal racial profiling. How does a police officer determine which of the criminals he arrests deserves further scrutiny for immigration status? I worry that the first time a citizen is asked for proof of legal status and is detained because all they can produce is a driver’s license, lawsuits are going to crop up, and the state will be in a different kind of trouble.

Whatever else you think about President Obama, he has seen more National Guard troops deployed to our Southern border than ever before. It may not be enough to stop every single person from crossing, but it’s at least a start. We need to dis-incentivize both employers from hiring illegal immigrants and workers from seeking employment in America without immigrating legally. All of the things which could curtail illegal immigration need to be at a Federal level in order to be effective. Otherwise, we’re just going to be shuffling high concentrations of illegal immigrants around the country and spreading the pain of “cheap labor” and unpaid taxes around.

I don’t agree with the law at all because of my previously stated reasons, but if it spurs Congress into a comprehensive examination of both the current system and possible solutions (leading to badly needed Immigration Reform), perhaps some good can come out of the situation in the end.

I am glad to know that U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton, a Clinton appointee was NOT influenced by that fact.

I know a JUDGE would never use their power to help out a POLITICAL Party that had given them their position.

I know that this “JUDGE” will not be moved into a higher position of authority by a POLITICAL Party in the future for having betrayed the USA and her citizens today.

We would all be shocked to see something like that happen.

Since this decision came from U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton, a Clinton appointee,

I cannot see that POLITICS nor the DEMOCRATIC party would have influenced her decision.

Oh, you mean like how politics had no influence on the Supreme Court stopping the voting in Florida in Gore v. Bush? Or how Clarence Thomas’s wife is now working for a right-wing political organization? Or that Scalia spends his free time going hunting with Dick Cheney?
.
Your moronic analysis can’t seem to look past the fat in your brain. While Bolton’s ruling is legally sound, politically it is much more likely to benefit the Republicans.

A few notes in response/extension to usesherbrain (my brain hurt trying to follow Rusty’s garbage)
1) Obama’s also escalated the efforts to crack down on employers of illegal immigrants – an effort that started within his first six months but has been quietly going with next to no real mention or notoriety to it. IIRC, he’s more than doubled the pace of inspections and arrests over Bush’s figures.
2) There are four realistic scenarios on how to properly enforce that component of the law: racial profiling (regardless of legality), ask everyone, don’t ask unless you’ve been given pretty explicit indicators they’re an illegal (eg: something slips, etc), or the meta-world where only illegals will be asked without racial profiling being a problem. I’ll toss out the fourth one because I can’t see it happening (and, actually, if it actually did happen by remote chance, it might still result in lawsuits under the other 3 scenarios). In the first case, obviously lawsuits would be forthcoming because of racial profiling. In the second case, the Daily Show actual did a special where one of their correspondents went around a Pheonix bar asking various (Caucasian) individuals for proof of citizenship….and getting a lot of very angry responses about how they “obviously” were American. You could just see a lawsuit show up from that – especially since you’d likely lack reasonable suspicion to be able to ask for said proof. Finally, in the third case, there is an explicit line in the law saying that the law must be enforced – if it isn’t “being enforced”, then the local police force can be sued. Imagine this scenario: Joe and Jose get into a bar fight, brought down to the police station. Joe demands that Jose’s citizenship be checked. If the police check it, Jose could say it was unfairly done to him only because his name is Jose. If, to balance it out, the police check Joe’s citizenship, he could be pissed off because there’s no reasonable suspicion of his citizenship. If they don’t check it, Joe could still sue them for not enforcing the law. It’s a bloody ridiculous law.
3) The law also presumes that you even have one of a birth certificate/driver’s license/passport (for natural citizens). However, not everyone knows how to drive, not everyone can afford a passport (or bothered to get one), and how many of us have lost track of our birth certificate (and can prove that it is us on said birth certificate?) It’s a gongshow stupid law and I’m not even remotely sad to find those parts of it suspended.